M3 or S4?

[graider]

Originally Posted by footie

No significant chassis work would be required with AWD. If your comments were addressed the the M3 then I could understand how 600hp would be more than a handful, it could cope but you would have to be so ginger with the throttle most of the time it would make you question the expense of all the modifications in the first place.

would 11" wide rim/tire in the rear help in the m3 case?

[footie]

Originally Posted by graider

would 11" wide rim/tire in the rear help in the m3 case?

A little but not that much in reality. The problem with the M3 is it's 50/50 weight balance, when you continue to add enough more power the desired weight balance must shift more to the rear if that is where all the power is being feed. Look at all the 600+hp supercars made of late, all of them have had more weight at the rear to combat traction issues that arise with so much power.

Everything is a compromise, BMW's weight balance of 50/50 promotes a sweet balance but as you up the power then traction becomes a problem, the supercar's 40/60 balance helps with the traction but reduces turn-in.

This discussion will ultimately turn into a 'which is best?' debate, especially if you go hunting for more and more power. It's one area where an awd chassis has a major advantage over rwd, you are basically spreading the load over the complete chassis and the power can freely shift between the axle with the most grip. Unlike a rwd chassis where you have to feather the throttle to maintain traction an awd chassis can take everything it's got, regardless of whether it's wet or dry and in most cases will near enough produce identical times to 60mph like what the S4 did in a recent UK test, posting the same time in the wet as it did in the dry. Try doing that in a rwd car!

[graider]

Originally Posted by footie

A little but not that much in reality. The problem with the M3 is it's 50/50 weight balance, when you continue to add enough more power the desired weight balance must shift more to the rear if that is where all the power is being feed. Look at all the 600+hp supercars made of late, all of them have had more weight at the rear to combat traction issues that arise with so much power.

Everything is a compromise, BMW's weight balance of 50/50 promotes a sweet balance but as you up the power then traction becomes a problem, the supercar's 40/60 balance helps with the traction but reduces turn-in.

This discussion will ultimately turn into a 'which is best?' debate, especially if you go hunting for more and more power. It's one area where an awd chassis has a major advantage over rwd, you are basically spreading the load over the complete chassis and the power can freely shift between the axle with the most grip. Unlike a rwd chassis where you have to feather the throttle to maintain traction an awd chassis can take everything it's got, regardless of whether it's wet or dry and in most cases will near enough produce identical times to 60mph like what the S4 did in a recent UK test, posting the same time in the wet as it did in the dry. Try doing that in a rwd car!

in that case, secure a few sand bags in the trunk and call it a day. just like how we do it here in the winter to get more rear traction.

[ocgasman]

I had this exact same dilemma a couple of months ago. In fact, I was leaning heavily towards the S4, but ultimately chose the M3 for the following reasons:

1. The S4 was going for MSRP when it first came out and I don't believe they're discounting much right now if any. A fully loaded S4 the way I wanted was in the low 60's. I knew I could get a M3 for $500-1000 over invoice, so the price differential was becoming negligible in a vehicle in this price range.

2. I was in philly for 4 yrs and had an A4. The quattro was very useful during the winter. Now I live in socal, so the need for 4 wheel drive becomes less. However, you live in chicago. Will you be using this vehicle as a DD? Quattro shouldn't be underestimated in crappy weather. For me, the rear wheel drive of the M3 was so much more involving during my test drive than the S4. (of course the stock horsepower diff helps also )

3. I test drove both back to back as the dealerships were right next to each other. I drove the S4 first with my wife and we both came away super impressed and I was tempted to place an order right then and there. But we knew we also wanted to test drive the M3. On to BMW, the first thing you notice between the two is the throaty growl of the V8. The M3 sounds and feels like an untamed beast ready to be let out. The S4 supercharged blower sounded very anemic in comparison. While acceleration and handling was excellent on the S4, the S4 is out of its league when compared to an m3 (stock vs stock of course). But this isn't surprising as even Audi says that the S4 is a competitor for the 335.

Here's my take. The S4 would be an awesome DD for a casual enthusiast that every once in a while wants to let the car out, but is more concerned about livability. The M3 is for someone who wants a real driver's car, gas milage be damned. But we're talking stock vs stock. Now I hear that the S4's blower will be relatively easy to mod, but horsepower isn't everything. Don't discount the differences in suspension, handling, steering, seating (yes, the M3 seats are worlds better than the S4), etc, etc. HTH.

[graider]

um..agree all points, but I thought the s4 seat is recaro?

[footie]

Originally Posted by graider

um..agree all points, but I thought the s4 seat is recaro?

I also agree with his points, when price is near enough the same the desire for the more powerful car is hard to resist, especially living where rain is a lot less likely. Sporty Audi cars, in that I mean Quattro only really come into their own when you get a lot more rain during the year as we in the UK do, the performance loss in the dry to the likes of the RS4 vs M3 but in the wet it's a totally different story and here the two brands are very competitive to each other.

This may explain why I see more merit in quattro than most of the members from SolCal, it's not that I am pro-Audi only that my daily driving experiences lead me to a different conclusion.

P.S.
All S and RS models use Recaro seats.

[ocgasman]

Audi may use recaro seats and they were comfortable, but I loved the adjustable side bolsters on the M3

[graider]

Originally Posted by ocgasman

Audi may use recaro seats and they were comfortable, but I loved the adjustable side bolsters on the M3

gotcha.

[Kyoshi71]

Originally Posted by Jim Pearce

This should be a clue for those discussing the next M3 as well: more power is far less important than greater traction.

The torque coming from that 600hp small block is probably insane as well. The M could use some more of that too.

[footie]

Originally Posted by Jim Pearce

This should be a clue for those discussing the next M3 as well: more power is far less important than greater traction.

Well you see that's the trade off one must ultimately make if they want a practical 4/5 seater hi-performance car. Traction or involvement?

There is no argument that both are equally quick with continuously swapping position depending on the corner at each situation. Well that is true for dry conditions at least.

I'm of the opinion that the M3's power is at or maybe beyond the point for what it's 50/50 balance can comfortable handle with drivers of the level when unaided by the electronics. Even with what it's currently got it's all to ease to light up the rear tyres and if you simply left the electronics to cope then all you have is that little orange light blinking away merrily and a dull responsive throttle.

Reducing the overall weight would help, especially in the corners and should allow for less hp to achieve the same results. But what if there was another option, it's not impossible to get the best of both worlds, great traction and yet get very close to their ideal weight balance. What would be required is to adopt Nissan's approach to the GTR, basically mounting the gearbox, transfer box and rear diff together sending only power forward on demand. I bet BMW could keep most of the elements that make 'M' so magical yet benefit from a new found abilities of grip and traction.

More to the point, does BMW have the belief that their faithful would buy into such a dream and would they get there before Audi beat them to it, there are rumors that they are considering such a setup. By this I mean moving the platform to rwd and offering both rwd and awd on the full range but only awd on their hi-performance models.

[SCCAForums.com]

Footie... why are the Porsche Supercars of Today RWD?

Why are the Ferrari Supercars of Today RWD?

Why are all the 24hrs of Lemans Car World Record Setting Cars RWD?

Please get off this AWD high and mighty crap!!!

Turbo Porsche is there 'comfortable' 'civil' car... GT2, and GT3... are the Race bred cars!

When driven properly... RWD always wins... unfortunately AWD (99% of the time) is handicapped by just adding way to much weight to the nose, and drivetrain of the car.

The limiting factor and anything giving an edge to AWD is the lack of tire grip, anyone looking to track their cars, over comes this very quickly by running DOT approved race tires... this is where the AWD cars suffer (read PUSH) greatly... and RWD cars leave them in the distance.

S4 is now a car competing with BMW's 3's 335i's... a true devastating blow to any Audi loyalist.

[kmac1980]

Originally Posted by SCCAForums.com

Footie... why are the Porsche Supercars of Today RWD?

Why are the Ferrari Supercars of Today RWD?

Why are all the 24hrs of Lemans Car World Record Setting Cars RWD?

Please get off this AWD high and mighty crap!!!

Turbo Porsche is there 'comfortable' 'civil' car... GT2, and GT3... are the Race bred cars!

When driven properly... RWD always wins... unfortunately AWD (99% of the time) is handicapped by just adding way to much weight to the nose, and drivetrain of the car.

The limiting factor and anything giving an edge to AWD is the lack of tire grip, anyone looking to track their cars, over comes this very quickly by running DOT approved race tires... this is where the AWD cars suffer (read PUSH) greatly... and RWD cars leave them in the distance.

S4 is now a car competing with BMW's 3's 335i's... a true devastating blow to any Audi loyalist.

How ironic, I would have thought exactly the opposite. The fact the S4 matches up with the 335i means that there is a faster, better handling car coming in the next year or two from Audi targeting the M3 market, the RS4.

[SCCAForums.com]

Originally Posted by kmac1980

How ironic, I would have thought exactly the opposite. The fact the S4 matches up with the 335i means that there is a faster, better handling car coming in the next year or two from Audi targeting the M3 market, the RS4.

Kmac... that's like saying the '04 - '07 S4 competed with the 330i?

Seriously?

[kmac1980]

Originally Posted by SCCAForums.com

Kmac... that's like saying the '04 - '07 S4 competed with the 330i?

Seriously?

it didn't, the pricing on the S4 has come down with the latest iteration, with the intent of putting the S4 in line with the 335i and saving the RS4 to compete with the m3

the b6/b7 (04-07) S4 here in canada went for $80K+CAD well optioned.

The current B8 S4 in canada goes for low $60Ks CAD well optioned, right around the price of a loaded 335xi

[footie]

Originally Posted by SCCAForums.com

Kmac... that's like saying the '04 - '07 S4 competed with the 330i?

Seriously?

What you are saying is that in your opinion the older S4 couldn't be compared to the E46 M3 and as there wasn't a 335i model at that time the next model down was the 330i.

Now who is kidding. Comparing something with what 230hp to another with 340hp when the logical model (M3) had the exact same output and else where in the world had exclusively been the only BMW model that the S4 was compared to and it didn't always lose that battle mind.

I'm not denying that most motorsport is rwd but last time I looked I and I bet you drove almost exclusively on the road so the merits of added traction with awd is still a very valid one and Nissan have proved that it can be exciting without reverting to mounting the engine in the middle.

My point was that I bet BMW (probably better than most) could even improve on what Nissan did.

If you see that as a threat to your idealistic world then you really need to get out more.

[stickypaws]

Originally Posted by ocgasman

Here's my take. The S4 would be an awesome DD for a casual enthusiast that every once in a while wants to let the car out, but is more concerned about livability. The M3 is for someone who wants a real driver's car....

My take, too. Especially taking in consideration the AWD vs RWD argument.
I much prefer RWD dynamics but would definitely own a S4 as a great DD that can still give me a smile.

(imho, these two are really apples and oranges; RWD vs AWD, high revving NA vs mod friendly blower, totally different steering and chassis dynamics, etc..)

[SCCAForums.com]

Footie... I appreciate you finely recognizing AWD is not law. It's very re-assuring.

You're far from a threat my friend... just gets old seeing your 'praise alla audi' over and over...

RWD is and always will be king in the asphalt!

And 1.) Yes I do race my cars... and 2.) I enjoy driving spiritedly and 'drifting' around corners on a weekly basis, if not daily.

Enjoy your diesel jag!

Last note... yes... I agree with most here, Audi's are great Daily Drivers... and more spirited than that of an every day Lexus.

[footie]

Originally Posted by SCCAForums.com

Footie... I appreciate you finely recognizing AWD is not law. It's very re-assuring.

You're far from a threat my friend... just gets old seeing your 'praise alla audi' over and over...

RWD is and always will be king in the asphalt!

Maybe it's just me but I don't see how admitting the benefits of awd to be the same as constantly praising Audi but if you say so. Also if you read most of my posts on the subject of rwd vs awd you should notice that I continuously comment that rwd is the more involving, I just don't happen to agree that it's always the quicker of the two.

Originally Posted by SCCAForums.com

And 1.) Yes I do race my cars... and 2.) I enjoy driving spiritedly and 'drifting' around corners on a weekly basis, if not daily.

Enjoy your diesel jag!

Last note... yes... I agree with most here, Audi's are great Daily Drivers... and more spirited than that of an every day Lexus.

I haven't driven competitively for a while but still keep myself sharp other ways. And yes I'm enjoying the diesel Jag, great car for relaxing after a hard day at the office. Oh and you are right, Audi do make great daily drivers, I don't think I have ever said anything different than that, but if I have please let me know.

But to deny the benefits that awd can bring to either motorsport or the open road when developed correctly is very stupid, the same is true for forced induction but then we all know that by now.

[BimmerBoomer]

BMW are using the same Magna sourced differential that the S4 uses in the X6 M and X5 M - just different software. It can be adapted to rwd and can improve traction without necessarily going to awd. The key is it can kick in before slip. http://www.bmw.com/com/en/insights/t...e_control.html

[SCCAForums.com]

Originally Posted by footie

But to deny the benefits that awd can bring to either motorsport or the open road when developed correctly is very stupid, the same is true for forced induction but then we all know that by now.

I think I made some good points, referencing that in true unlimited motorsports... (as well as supercars meant for the road course) awd has no benefit (unless it's raining), and most prefer RWD.

So I don't know where the stupidity comment is coming from... since Porsche & Ferrari seem to be doing quite well. (As do Mercedes & BMW).

Peace,
Dave

[footie]

Originally Posted by SCCAForums.com

I think I made some good points, referencing that in true unlimited motorsports... (as well as supercars meant for the road course) awd has no benefit (unless it's raining), and most prefer RWD.

Your knowledge of the history of all forms of motorsport is quite limited if you genuinely believe those about comments to be true.

In truth awd has been continuously banned from most forms of motorsport because it gives an unfair advantage and ultimately costs far more to develop properly which in turn benefits the better funded competitors like manufacturers.

Rwd keep competition close because it's very limited on what improvements can be done over and above your competition, better to watch and most exciting for all competing.

Originally Posted by SCCAForums.com

So I don't know where the stupidity comment is coming from... since Porsche & Ferrari seem to be doing quite well. (As do Mercedes & BMW).

Peace,
Dave

Do you genuinely believe that if Porsche decided to develop a hardcore version of the Turbo that it wouldn't be their quickest on the track. For a start it's plain to just about everyone here that such a car could easily cope with more power than it's two wheel drive equivalent but Porsche realise as I do too that it wouldn't be as involving a drive and that is what most probably want, especially as these cars are seldom driven in the rain or beyond the occasional blast at the weekend, be it on a back road or on the track.

A perfect example of 4wd being better than 2wd is the Gallardo, the R8v10 is a quicker car on the track than the 2wd Gallardo, even with a huge weight penalty and less power.

P.S.

I'll ask you a question, which would stay on the road the longest without the aid of the rear wing for downforce, would it be the GT2 or the Turbo?

Clearly I could talk till the cows come home but you will continue to deny the benefits in awd even though I openly admit to you that it's the least involving of the two.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by footie

A perfect example of 4wd being better than 2wd is the Gallardo, the R8v10 is a quicker car on the track than the 2wd Gallardo, even with a huge weight penalty and less power.

2wd Gallardo? You must be talking about the new 550-2 Valentino Balboni I guess. Where'd you see that car compared to an R8 V10? I'm curious and would like to read that review.